"Carsten Agger" <agger at faklen.dk> wrote:
>What is the relation between the physiology of vision and the
>world we see?
Other stuff swings on a different rate.
> Is what wee see a one-to-one representation of
>the world as it "really is",
No. You just perceive fractions.
>"or is it rather true that our visual world
>is "created" by the ohysiological processes,
Partially.
>so that "The World
>is in the Eye":
No.
>A quote: "Dualism, where there is an 'outer world' represented in an 'inner
>world', observed by some type of 'soul',
I have no soul.
Mainly the sequencer observes and sometimes I.
Guess I could have eg.1 sort of perceive, but I rarely do that.
Once did with a friend and he first thought I was scanning him
magically, but checking magically he raeliozed that I was not, and
went real puzzled, and asked me disquieted what I did, because he
knew that I was scanning with high intesity, just did not know what
I was scanning of him.
I had known him a while, and he had never seen me do that
So it is really rare I do that.
But I guess non-autists do that more and maybe a lot, but maybe
different.
>operates with observer-independent objects, which the visual system depicts.
Hmmmm.... (ponder...)
Might depend if you look magically or not and on what ranges.
> As discussed here, vision does not
>depict anything in any traditional sense;
?
I guess it is a traditional sense.
Fish already have eyes.
>it constructs a visual world from
>a monstrously tangled puzzle of nerve impulses."
I take it that you are not into magic perception.